Preparing the US Army for WW2

[@elizondojessie15]

I served with Captain Moran (Chieftain) in Afghanistan. This guy is an amazing Army Officer.

[@F14thunderhawk]

you cant just mention that and not leave stories

[@alexdrockhound9497]

You can tell he cares and is passionate about it, and is good at thinking through problems. Good signs for an effective leader.

[@copter2000]

He will remind you to do track tension.

[@Br1cht]

The Taliban still won:)

[@scottjoseph9578]

​@@Br1cht He had retired by then, and Joe Biden was POTUS. Obama and Biden are/were horrible commanders in chief.

[@thejohnbeck]

Props to the lady recording horizontally

[@--Dani]

Right...

[@elstevobevo]

American hero!

[@himemjam]

For real. Really good job.

[@videoviewer2008]

Heck yeah.

[@QuixEnd]

I think we're back to vertical these days and now we're the old ones.

[@JoshuaC923]

Almost two hours of Chieftain talking? Awesomeness

[@JoshuaC923]

That was an absolute delight to watch, thank you Chieftain!

[@joeblow9657]

the tank messiah has risen!!

[@jannarkiewicz633]

Take that Drach!!!!

[@JoshuaC923]

@@jannarkiewicz633 i listen to Drach everyday 😂

[@KK-xz4rk]

But, but he promised 3 hours........ *sad noises*

[@thomasnoble1816]

My father was in the Fourth Division from Normandy to the Hurtgen Forest- where he received his third “golden” wound. The more that learn what he went through the more I realized what a minor miracle it is that I exist.

[@cl4998]

God bless your father.

[@ramdynebix]

At events where I (or people like me) are involved with recording we remind speakers continually about repeating questions from the audience because they never show up on the recording unless the presenter repeats it or the audience gets a microphone. It add so much more context to an answer knowing the question 😉

[@brianj.841]

I agree.

[@EmyrDerfel]

at least Nic was generally pretty quiet while a question was being asked, and there was minimal background noise so you could fix it in post and boost the mic gain for that period, but having a second mic facing the audience would be good.

[@tgapmax4051]

@@EmyrDerfel This RedLeg couldn't hear any of the audience. & I'm using Bose noise cancellation headphones.

[@walterm140]

@@EmyrDerfel The closed captioning doesn't pick up the questions either. It would be nice if they were repeated.

[@Zsswimmer1]

@Walter Miller closed captioning was struggling in general with his accent and had some funny interpretations of what he was saying at times. Still, for like 75 percent of vids (maybe more, tbh) its impressively accurate and I'm always a little irritated when a video doesn't have it as an option lol. But I used captions as soon as I coild basically understand how to use the TV remote and go thru menu settings, so I've been doing it essentially most of my life Sometimes it's easy to forget YT subtitles are a whole different thing than cable - I'm guessing there wS someone actually transcribing stuff because a new episode of any show, if they even had cc available, was so poor and always a few seconds behind it was distracting enough to turn off. Like even within the last decade, though I haven't had cable in some time. Kind of amazing now...being so far into the tech age, with all the little conveniences that I get 'used' to and forget their positives, esp since there are so many truthful concerns about tech and where it's heading. I love having CC available on most things I watch, probably obvious from my post lol

[@jeffg1524]

The Chieftain's breadth of military knowledge is truly remarkable. Keep in mind, what we see in these lectures is just a fraction of what he really knows.

[@Paciat]

WarGaming was hiring a tank god and this major applied. Love that life story.

[@alanrogers7090]

Don't forget, he is a Lt. Col. in the Army, and was a tank commander. I stressed was, as a Lt. Col., he can't play with his tanks any more, just sit around in offices playing World of Tanks, or War Thunder..

[@mitchellsmith4690]

Most good officers have an amazing breadth of history and general knowlege, and then some scary detailed in their specialty.

[@deth3021]

You get that he prepares for these lectures right?

[@mitchellsmith4690]

@@deth3021 You get you have to know what to prepare, right?

[@Largecow_Moobeast]

Just two hours of a scholar getting into a topic he loves and has deeply researched. Perfection.

[@crichtonbruce4329]

Dear Mr. Chieftain: You are one of the best presenters, of any subject, on KZbin. Drachinfel and you are in a class above. Thank you for many hours of informative and entertaining content.

[@anotherrandominternetdog]

Seconding Drachinfel. I was just thinking yesterday how the chap from Driving 4 Answers is also excellent in explaining technical topics in an effective, efficient and interesting manner.

[@desobrien3827]

And "Perun" check out this fellow Aussie sir!😀

[@anotherrandominternetdog]

@@desobrien3827 ah, how could I forget Perun! Legend. Also in no particular order, others who are good at explaining their topics (from military-related through science, engineering, and other stuff) in a clear and engaging manner - Ryan McBeth, Veritasium, Anders Puck Nielsen, CGP Grey, Hank Green, Physics Girl, Hoplopfheil, Tom Scott, the Tank Museum, Fort Nine, Steve Mould, Minute Physics, The History Guy, Smarter Every Day, and for longer form excellence, C&Arsenal. And Forgotten Weapons, of course.

[@johnmichaelgavin3617]

Throw in some Gregs Airplanes and Automobiles and you have the holy trinity completed

[@Chiller01]

With the M4 Sherman being adequately redeemed the Chieftain turns his talents toward Leslie McNair’s tattered reputation.

[@tyree9055]

"Adequately redeemed?" I won't blame the tank for its reputation. It was a good piece of kit (for its role as a medium tank). I blame Eisenhower and his team for not preparing properly for the evolution of warfare within the European Theater of Operations. They knew the Germams were developing advanced tanks and tank destroyers but didn't start trying to develop their own until after the embarrassing losses in Normandy came to light.

[@jasonirwin4631]

@@tyree9055 a few problems with your statement 1. The T26 was already in development before d day. 2. Prototype tanks to replace the Sherman where also in development before US ground forces even arrived in Europe 3. A up gunned version of the Sherman with the 76mm gun in the 75mm turret had been developed before US troops arrived in Europe and was cancelled due the turret being to Small to effectively be used in combat 4. A 76mm Sherman with a proper turret was available before D-Day but not in Large enough numbers to replace all the tank taking part in the initial invasion and and the follow up maneuvers. Local units commanders aka officers below ike refused to Field mixed gun units over concerns of supply chain mistakes send the wrong ammo to tanks. 5. Ike had no say in what tanks where developed. He could request tank development and advise on what features he wanted his tanks to have but he couldn't order a tank in to development. US army ordinance branch did the development based on ETO request and armored board and US army ground forces had to approve anything ordnance developed.

[@edwardgranger1722]

@@jasonirwin4631 To add to your point: the 75mm gun was excellent for its intended purpose, which was infantry support and exploiting breakthroughs. American doctrine was not about defeating German tanks, but about destroying pillboxes and machines gun nests. American tanks in WWII fired much more HE than AT. The US Army assigned independent tank battalions to infantry division whereas the Germans did not. Whether not there were enough 76mm gunned Shermans to replace the 75mm Shermans was not that main issue - front-line commanders just didn't feel like that 76mm gun was required for the mission, even though individual tank commanders who had faced Panzers instead of pillboxes might have felt differently. In the end, there were plenty of tank units in Europe that were mix-gunned. As you point out - requests for better tanks spent years in development, and sometimes the tank you have on hand is better than the Tiger-beater you can have by 1947. People easily forget that American tanks not only had to be effective in combat - they also had to fit onto train cares, and into cargo holds and across improvised bridges.

[@mk-ultraviolence1760]

@@tyree9055 Actually one of the things about the numbers of losses is that they are incredibly misleading. The allies had a tendency to overcount their losses and some tanks would be lost more than once because they would often be repaired and sent back to front. The Germans under-recorded for their losses for obvious propaganda reasons and would count tanks that absolutely had no hope of being repaired or tanks the required extensive repair as still being operational. Also advanced tanks and tank destroyers? You do know that the 75mm armed sherman could actually knock out those 'advanced' tanks right? Because it did.

[@tyree9055]

@@mk-ultraviolence1760 Yep, the Americans (or the Allies?) had a 700% loss rate in Normandy. That wasn't an overcount. Each tank was knocked out 7× in the month (?) after D-Day alone. ...and when I say 'advanced,' I don't mean a Pz. IVG or H, but a Panther G or King Tiger, which the Germans had available at that time.

[@bayoubengal07]

I attended this talk. The Chieftain gave a great talk and I highly recommend the museum too!

[@madhungarian3024]

On the exciting subject of track tension, when i watch youtube channels by landscapers and other civilians who drive tractors & bobcats & mini-skid-steers and such, they mention the importance of track tension too. Making comments like, "Yeah the track came off today because it wasn't tensioned right." So it's not just The Chieftain who worries about that sort of stuff!

[@richardmacdonald6303]

One of my favorite 'Learning Contracts' was Singer Sewing Machine CO, produced 500 of the finest M-1911A1s ever made, now highly sought after collector items one recently went for $80,500 thru RIA. Singer household lines were redirected to military production, but commercial models increased production for the Military and mil contractors. One of their big products made were Norden Bomb Sights.

[@csipawpaw7921]

Great lecture. When you talked about replacements it reminded me of my dad complaining about how he would survive a major action with one or two other men (every one else in the company being dead or wounded) and they would be sent to the depot and be reissued to another unit with green replacements and sent right back into action!

[@reddevilparatrooper]

Winchester went on to manufacture the M1 Garand while Remington went on to modify the M1903 for secondary issue rifle for support troops and general issue to include all small arms and M1911 pistols. During the mid 1980s I was issued a 1911 with a Remington frame with an Ithica slide, and Colt barrel from WWII.

[@bennewnham4497]

If it was good enough for your granddaddy to kill Nazis', it will be good enough for you.

[@chipholland9]

Two stories about my dad regarding your story about the AGCT @1:00:00. He got turned into a radio operator because he knew that the "SCR" in SCR-300 stood for "Signal Corps Radio". He was carrying one when he was wounded at Elsenborn Ridge during the Battle of the Bulge as a member of the 99th ID (minor neck wound from a ricochet off the jeep - he was fine)

[@ChickenDetonator]

The good boi corgi in the corner of the frame was slightly distracting.

[@bayoubengal07]

I was there. The corgi was a very good dog. He is owned by a lady that works at the museum.

[@JamesLaserpimpWalsh]

Thanks Chieftain. Nice insights into the old horse equipped cavalry as well.

[@anthonylathrop7679]

Audio quality is good too

[@davidbriggs7365]

Unfortunately, the Chief of the Cavalry Branch was very horse minded, and so resisted mechanization until Marshall was finally able to end the Chief of the Combat Arms Branches.

[@Edax_Royeaux]

Supposedly the Polish Horse Cavalry did well at ambushing the sleeping German Infantry at the Charge at Krojanty, and the Germans being so sensitive to defeat spin-doctored the battle into Polish lances and sabers assaulting German tanks in a fictional battle, which the Soviets co-opted to portray the Polish as backwards and their new Soviet overlords as superior.

[@ab5olut3zero95]

Wasn’t it 10th Mountain Cavalry that hit the beaches in Saipan carrying saddles intending to commandeer local horses?

[@davidbriggs7365]

@@ab5olut3zero95 Actually, I would have been VERY surprised to find the 10th Mountain Cavalry hitting the beaches of Saipan, for a couple of reasons. First, while the 27th Infantry Division did see combat on Saipan, it was the Marine 3rd Division and 1st Brigade (later to become the core of the 6th Marine Division) which formed the first several waves on Saipan, it was not until several days (if not actually weeks) that the 27th landed. And second, Saipan was invaded in June 1944, whereas the 10th Mountain Cavalry (if such a unit actually existed, and had been part of the 10th Mountain Division) did not enter combat until December 1944, if not actually in 1945, and then it was committed to Italy, a whole world away from Saipan.

[@williamharvey8895]

I love these long lecture/presentation / training sessions. I almost feel that I'm back in the army.

[@eliasgordon4321]

I got to see this lecture in person and it was a great one!

[@samobispo1527]

The tank destroyer concept is alive and well. The attack helicopter is a tank destroyer. Every Bradley and Striker armed with TOW missiles is a tank destroyer.

[@filmandfirearms]

No, they just have the capability to engage tanks and live. A tank destroyer is a vehicle with the primary purpose of engaging enemy tank. An attack helicopter's primary purpose is CAS, whether against infantry or armor. The primary purpose of a Bradley or Striker is troop transport. They only have the anti tank weapons so that their infantry doesn't get blown up the second an enemy tank appears. Their intended primary target is enemy infantry, hence the autocannons and heavy machine guns, while they only carry a couple TOW missiles

[@bojangles8873]

​@@filmandfirearmsThe Stryker has a specific variant purpose built for engaging tanks. The M1134. I assume that's what op is referring to. Even if he wasn't, that still kind of proves part of his point.

[@NeuKrofta]

Those questions were hard to get through. I wish I was there. McNair seems like a workaholic, the amount of things he achieved and did is impressive.

[@EpsilonR_]

I love the Museum of the American GI...it's truly amazing how much operational equipment is housed there and run often!

[@robertphillips9017]

Have you read “if you survive” by Wilson? Excellent tales of replacements. His company, like others, suffered about 200% casualties. He was a replacement 2lt at about D+4 or so.

[@robertphillips9017]

George was in 4th ID. The book title was part of his first briefing “we are attacking in the morning, … if you survive I will promote you.”

[@Chilly_Billy]

Terrific book. I first read it in my teens during the 80's.

[@scottjoseph9578]

​@@robertphillips9017 And they didn't.

[@adamstrange7884]

Love the book, it showed the reality of infantry in the ETO in WW2!

[@thomaslinton5765]

An uncle, who was a "red leg" in the 9th ID in north Africa, took four years of German in high school. He talked to German prisoners-of-war in Tunesia. They asked him what his battery's ration of 155 was for a day. They were stunnd to hear his answer, which I recall as apx this: " Whatever we needed to fire our missions until told to cease fire." He was at Thala when the German counter-offenive died in a hail of howitzer shells.

[@lostalone9320]

I think its in the Battle of the Bulge movie, where the Germans capture an American truck and it's full of Boston cream pies, as a Christmas desert. And the German officer looks at this valuable transport, which burns valuable fuel, and clogs up an important logistics rout, all just to carry fancy, expensive, unnecessary treats and says "We can never win this war". The point being that if the Americans have so much logistics capacity that they can fully supply Allied Forces Europe and still have enough left over to send out pies for fun, then the US is so damn far ahead that it almost doesn't matter about anything else. The whole story of WW2 (from the German side) is the story of sidelining logistics. The reason why the Germans succeeded when their armies were full of Panza 2s and started to fail when they were full of Pana 3s is all about logistics. You invade Poland and France with these kinda crappy tanks, but they are closer to their supply depots and have plenty of fuel and they work great. But when you are charging towards Moscow in really good tanks, suddenly they just don't work anymore. Great commanders with experienced crews, but they don't have fuel or spares and they whole unit slows and their effectiveness wanes and that, in effect, is the end of that.

[@nunyabidniz2868]

@@lostalone9320 Not a movie, but when asked to perform an engineering assessment of a Pratt&Whitney radial engine from a downed plane early in the war and they saw that it didn't leak & how close the tolerances were, running it through the tests & seeing the power output, having an idea of how many engines the US was producing [from spies] etc. it is said the lead engineer opined "We have already lost this war..."

[@paavobergmann4920]

In some documentary about the Battle of the Bulge, they interviewed a german veteran, and he said: " what really disheartened us, when we at some point made our first american POWs, was to see how well fed they were. It was astonishing. We felt we couldn´t possibly resist this force."

[@ExceptionallyCleverUsername]

@@nunyabidniz2868 I've seen a radial engine up close. Those things leak like a British motorcycle. Also, the Germans had the BMW 801, which had a full engine control unit, which the US never developed. Wha t the Germans couldn't do was to efficiently produce vast quantities of simple, sophisticated, easy- to- manufacture powerplants.

[@Chiller01]

Your uncle drove 800 miles across most of Algeria to arrive at Thala and save the day. The artillery of the 9th Infantry Division stopped the German armour in its tracks, literally.

[@CharliMorganMusic]

I love your presentations like this.

[@TimCristy]

Interesting to hear since my grandfather was involved in this. He told us that the first half of the war his job was forming cadres to stand up new units. Second half, he was a liason officer to the navy in the pacific. Retired a full colonel.

[@andrewgilbert4155]

As usual a thought provoking and interesting discussion.

[@canniballollocaust9174]

The dog left the lecture when he realized it wouldn't be on the history of track tensioning

[@CharliMorganMusic]

When people accuse China of being a paper tiger, this is exactly the period of American military history that I refer them to; we were not nearly as ready for WW2 as we like to think we were, and much more capable than the rest of the world thought us to be.

[@SirCheezersIII]

Yes and no. Yes, in the sense that China can equip a world-class military relatively easily, even if some pieces might not be as good as the competition, it's enough decent equipment to amass a truly monumental force. But no in the culture that the PLA currently exists in. In China, military service is regarded as a temporary civic obligation: most people who go in do so to serve out a 24-month term and leave, never to return to the colors. While they are in the military, the majority of the energy spent is in political education: teaching the private soldiers how to be good citizens and party members. Actual training is secondary. Finally, leadership is invested not in an NCO Corps like most Western militaries or even in junior officers but in senior officials who are appointed to their positions because of their relationships in the CCP. Career officers are rare in the PLA, and to be an officer in the PLA is seen as a side gig to boost your political standing rather than a calling. So, in any case, not a paper tiger but not a steam roller either.

[@diggman88]

China remains a communist oligarchy. As such, the politics of power will always leave their military leadership dysfunctional. Offend even a minor party official can make you enemies all the way up the hierarchy and likely end your career. Worse yet be competent at your job and party officials might start considering you a threat or competition. By contrast a US army officer in the 1930s would have to do something very brash and public to get a public official calling for their job.

[@diggman88]

As a second note, I'm not saying we should dismiss China when planning against them. We should always assume the worst and prepare contingencies. It's just nice to know that they have even worse problems to deal with than us.

[@elbolainas4174]

The thing is, the US is a democracy. Democratic governments are subject to accountability. Corruption can only go so far with some agency actively looking for numbers that don't add up and asking questions. Democracies are also not stagnant, the next guy in office may not like what their predecessor did and start a witch hunt on corrupt officials. Nothing of this can happen in China or Russia where, not only corruption reachs the highest echelons of the government but anyone who tries to unfuck the system is soon to find himself falling out of a window. You can't train nothing but Potemkin armies that way.

[@adamloxley2551]

With regards to the US industry cooperation program before wartime, a comparison could be the Shadow Scheme in the UK, designed to quickly leverage existing production facilities to the war effort. They utilised motor manufacture to prepare to rapidly scale aircraft production when the need was such. Lemme know if you agree.

[@mpetersen6]

Makes sense. A slightly different approach but the point is to be able to meet the production needs if needed. Something I seriously doubt the US or Britiab could do today. And as much as everyone thinks the US lacks industrial capacity there is still a large amount of industrial capacity in the US (1). The UK I'm not sure (2). The other question is just how much more technology dense certain items such as MBTs are compared to their WWll counterparts. Much less aircraft. Another thing the US ramping up production in what were normally non armaments manufacturers was the massive infusion of machine tools and plant facilities to these companies. Facilities that never got bombed. As the the machine tool industry see note 1. 1) One major problem would be in the tooling up phase given the gutting of the trades and the machine tool industry in the US. One reason the machine tool industry was gutted was trade and tax policies that allowed off shore manufacturers to carry stocks of brand new machines in the US that had not cleared customs yet Hence not subject to duties or taxes. While domestic manufacturers had to pay inventory taxes on just about everything hence building to order. 2) As a geography nerd I am well aware of the differences and limited interchangeably between the terms United Kingdom, Great Britian, England etc.

[@vonschlesien]

@@mpetersen6 I wouldn't overplay the exodus of manufacturing. For example, the US produces about as much steel today as it did at the height of the war - that production just hasn't grown in the same way as the rest of the economy. It's not clear to me that the actual material requirements for weapons are higher than they were then; the added industrial might needed is in things like semiconductors and cryocoolers and optics and the like, where the US absolutely has tons of capacity, in some ways more than it did in WW2 even relative to competitors. And in part because of intentional industrial policy, the US has held on to aerospace and engine manufacturing. It's also directed automotive offshoring either to dependable Mexico and Canada, or "offshored" from traditional Northern production centers to the cheaper (and nonunionized) South. IMO what killed it was expected Cold War timescales, and then the professionalization of the military. Any WW3 was expected to be so short that this kind of industrial mobilization wouldn't have time to work; you'd go to war with the hardware built in peace. With the shift from a conscripted wartime-mobilization army to a professional small-reserve force, there also wasn't an expected scenario where the military would expand by 100X when war threatened. You can see this change in thinking in a shift to relationships with civilian *logistics*. Essentially every American ship and plane can be called up in time of war to move forces and equipment overseas, a great illustration of the kind of fast reaction the system considers necessary. Ukraine should, IMO, be a lesson that this isn't the only scenario. Over the Cold War and after, we've gotten VERY good at managing escalation between Great Powers. This means that knock down drag out industrial wars are still possible. Even if the US is not a direct combatant, it needs to be able to scale up to an Arsenal of Democracy within months, rather than the years we've found out it will take. The US also needs the training capability to turn a willing country's recruits into a capable force at WW2 speeds and growth rates. If we are rightly scared of direct Great Power confrontation in the nuclear age, we need to really prepare for proxy wars as a central tool of national and allied security, rather than an ad hoc small scale thing.

[@GoranXII]

No, the Shadow Scheme wasn't about leveraging _existing_ production facility to the war effort (Britain was already _fairly_ good at that), but about creating new ones.

[@egoalter1276]

In the wake of ww1 dual use industry was pretty much a unoversal thing. The US wasnt unique in its learning contacts, it was more umique in having industrial capacity that wasnt already explicitly considered as a potential strategic asset.

[@gotanon9659]

​@@vonschlesien Except that in general it takes years to scale up production capacity on any war material as the US has seen before ww2. Question is it really worth it when by the time the industry is in war time production footing the other guy is already signing the peace treaty.

[@RandyT-dj8pd]

I recommend "In the Presence of Soldiers" by Woody McMillin. It is a good book about the 2nd Army training conducted in Tennessee during WW2. The subsequent civilian-Army interactions are addressed. Also mentioned is other activity in the state in support of the war.

[@twentypdrparrott694]

I've got a small sheet iron skillet from the Luisiana-Texas maneuvers. The troops were issued these to cook their individual meal. When the exercise was concluded 100's of these little skillets were left in the field.

[@windwalker5765]

Hooray, a Chieftain lecture! His best content...

[@desobrien3827]

Brilliant presentation...Nicholas . I would be grateful for more "lectures/presentations" like this and previous efforts...Just love the history you bring to us all re WW2.

[@kemarisite]

About the same size as the Louisiana Maneuvers was the Oregon Maneuver in 1943. I'm especially fond of this one because it was started in what would later become my parents backyard. It then ranged all over Central and Eastern Oregon, territory I knew well growing up.

[@tgmccoy1556]

My Pop supplied wild horses to the US Calvary prior to 1939. The horse procurement was slowed down by '39. This was mainly Union, Grant, Umatilla counties. When they discontinued the Oregon program, Pop tried to join the US Calvary. At his physical, the Doc said: "Just because you broken down cowpunchers, can ride and shoot, ya think you can join the Calvary.- half of you guys should be in wheelchairs and you're one of them." Ranching life is hard on you😁.

[@kemarisite]

@@tgmccoy1556 good to hear. I have family up in the Hermiston and Pendleton area, including the one great uncle I know who died in the war.

[@tsk9277]

Nice to see a decent Q&A, I recall watching another lecture you did a few years ago and barely anyone asked anything at the end.

[@SamGray]

Was that the Anti-Armour lecture to soldiers at the Javelin school? I remember thinking that if I'd got a lecture like that in training I'd ask as many questions as possible, each designed to get the longest possible answer so as to not get back to running around for the maximum time. 😉

[@WindFireAllThatKindOfThing]

I especially enjoyed responses touching on AI, in light of the fervor to implement it despite the effectiveness of crude techniques to defeat it. Like the 8 marines who were tasked with spoofing an AI sentry system looking for troops crawling, marching, or charging towards it. All passed. By using childish tricks, like disguising themselves as a cardboard box metal-gear style, and doing cartwheels.

[@Tan444]

hey! great talk. as a tip, when taking audience questions it helps to repeat the question so everyone can hear it since the audience doesn’t have a microphone

[@willfrankunsubscribed]

This was a great lecture. Wish I could have been there in person. Thanks for sharing it

[@markcantemail8018]

24 : 57 Bottom of Beer is Up . 25 :03 Bottom up training is First , as seen on Screen Shown . Awesome Chieftain your Timing is Perfect ! Very informative Presentation I learned so much Thank You .

[@NAP789]

Great lecture, I appreciate the research behind many of the false assumptions of WW2. Keep up the good work & thanks!

[@splatterberry]

Brilliant presentation.

[@GeneralJackRipper]

_"The American Army consists of 180,000 men whose only skill is having a picnic on the weekend."_ - Benito Mussolini 1939 (Paraphrased)

[@TheAngelobarker]

Ik someone is going to show up and hur dur Italy army bad. At the beginning of the war were in the middle of a restructuring, a caliber change, and had been at war for 10 years in Ethiopia and Spain wearing out their equipment. Mussolini was expecting a war in 1945 but the Germans lied. They handled themselves MORE than adequately in north Africa and Russia. (Let's not mention that idiot of an officers stupid idea of invading Greece with a bunch of untrained reservists although the alpini and messe fought perfectly adequately)

[@mpetersen6]

Well we know how that worked out in the end.

[@murphy7801]

@@mpetersen6 missing the point of the talk. It took a huge amount effort to get USA into shape.

[@mpetersen6]

@@murphy7801 Of course it did. My point is Il Duce just couldn't read the tea leaves

[@davidbrennan660]

......and how did that go for him? 😂

[@mikehagan4320]

This seems to be are Rare lecture that actually has Good audio. Best Wishes! M.H

[@joeblow9657]

1:54 what a handsome corgi!!

[@mkillian]

I've watched this video three or four times now, and everytime it comes up I click on it again. These long form talks are brilliant when you do them.

[@mitternacht4062]

Respect to the chieftain for putting in all the slides again in the video after recording.

[@bbcmotd]

7:20 the USSR established an organizational called GTO (or Ready For Labor and Defense of USSR) in 1931. It too was at the junction of civilian and military areas - civilians were taught to fire a rifle, throw a grenade, wear gas masks and even paradrop from planes.

[@canuck600A]

Thanks for doing this, I've been waiting for something that continued on from your doctrine video.

[@cheesenoodles8316]

The Chieftain has been unleashed. Excellent.

[@randallsmith5631]

US Army & Army Air Forces & Navy & Marines went from 500k in 1939 to 16 million in 1945. Increased 3200%. WOW

[@chriscookesuffolk]

Really enjoyed this discussion thank you Chieftain.

[@mercAltiar]

Tanks and a corgi cameo? This is the quality content I come for.

[@TheAwesomeRohin85]

Another talk by the chieftain? I can't wait!

[@bassettraceengines]

Thank you!!! Great Work !!! In the future if you could repeat the questions of the audience.

[@jamescameron2490]

It was just as well that the U.S. Army first entered combat in North Africa, rather than the early landings in Europe many people were pushing for. It needed the North African experience to refine its doctrine and organization, blood its combat units, and, sort out its leadership. Often overlooked factor in the runup to war was the importance of the CCC. (Civilian Conservation Corps.) Run by the army, it gave the young men in the program an introduction to living in a regimented, communal environment, and in an era of limited military budgets, gave the officers in charge of the CCC camps warm bodies on which to hone their leadership skills.

[@tomhenry897]

Also produced an NCO cadre

[@ianstobie]

Also continued learning in Sicily, a large opposed amphibious landing.

[@rayjon237]

Thank you for posting this,. This is a great study in developing people and process,. Great talk..

[@ROBERTN-ut2il]

Allow me to point out, the huge number of non divisional units in the WW2 US Army. It was enough to raise twice the number of divisions that were actually raised (89 Army, 6 Marine), so a 200 division Arn=y wasn't a bad first approximation

[@ckvasnic1]

Very Informative and Enjoyable! Thanks your for your time! All the best... Chuck

[@christophersims7060]

That was quite informative and entertaining, thank you for your service and your time!

[@Kumimono]

Doggo! Would be useful, if possible, to have a short, transcription of what was asked in the Q&A section. Can't always hear too well. "Mumble mumble mumble?" "Yes." :)

[@walterm140]

I really enjoyed this brief on how the Army was determined to gain and retain a fighting edge through the big Maneuvers. And it was interesting to hear how the brigades in 1940 didn't cross attach infantry elements with armor or vice versa. But in 1941 they did. So the Army was moving fast to be the army it needed to be. I seem to recall reading decades ago that the Army 100-5 Operations manual of 1940 or 1941 copied large swathes of material directly from German practice. And units like 3rd and 4th Armored divisions, and others, became pretty adept at combined arms operations.

[@huma474]

Amazing talk as always. You have a great gift with presentations, they are almost always engaging and enjoyable.

[@thomasbernecky2078]

Excellent, thanks Chieftain. I'm now also hooked on Perun. So double thanks.

[@finncarlbomholtsrensen1188]

As a Dane I of course know former bike mechanic, Ford and G.M. Director, William S. Knudsen, who for a salary of 1$ became the Production Genius behind the huge American War Production!!

[@thee_maj703]

I got really excited when I saw the camp SLO picture, since I grew up near there and have a picture of me climbing on it when I was child

[@strydyrhellzrydyr1345]

Yayyyyyy... Over 90 minutes.. finally.. thanks Chief

[@iivin4233]

Ethical problems related to AI are really easy to solve if you remember that when a commander orders some soldiers to go kill something that he has just ordered separate, autonomous intelligences to kill something. The commander's orders, their army's doctrine and the intelligence and sensor suite of the human heads engaged in that combat all share responsibility for whoever dies as a result.

[@Edax_Royeaux]

From an ethics standpoint, we tend to get creeped out when Japan used the Kaiten human piloted torpedoes or Yokosuka MXY-7 Ohka human piloted suicide rockets, so why shouldn't we remove the human pilot from the bomb?

[@AsbestosMuffins]

the ethical problems regarding AI come from before you put them on the battlefield. For what its worth, nobody seems to make an actual automated gun turret like you see in video games, even though we have had the technology for quite some time now, though Israel has something nearly there, they even still require someone to push the kill button

[@Cookynator]

I think the only nation you could argue that took logistics even half as seriously as the US was Great Britain, and we did not have such an organisation as the Army Industrial College (within the military at least). The Admiralty had detailed plans on how to make use of every ounce of shipbuilding capability within the UK though, we had the Shadow Factory scheme to convert peacetime consumer goods producers into war material producers, and we had the Ministry of Supply, an entire government ministry dedicated to squeezing every last drop of wartime production from Britain's industry. I do think we could have benefited from having a few more officers within the Army who had an appreication of the finer points of industrial procurement however.

[@spencerdawkins]

I love your description of researching ordinance branch archives. OMG 😮

[@twentypdrparrott694]

My father was in the SW Pacific theater. Fresh off a troop ship he was sent to a manpower pool. At that time General Kenny was putting together the 475thFighter Group. The general to the best pilots, mechanics, etc. My father was fresh out of cook and baker school. He was assigned to the 475th's 432nd squadron. That was mid-May 1943. The only time that he left the unit was when he came down with malaria and when the then group commander took him to Kimpo Field Korea after the Japanese surrendered.

[@robertjames7160]

Nicely done.

[@alancranford3398]

The Repple Depple was a minor plot point in movies ranging from "Suddenly" (1954), "To Hell and Back" (1955), "The Big Red One" (1980) and even television shows such as "Combat!" The individual replacement system was still used until after of the Vietnam Conflict when it was replaced by pulling the entire unit back to the United States, then breaking up the veteran unit and forming entirely new units, sometimes retiring the colors of the veteran unit. The US Army became a global force during the Spanish American War and sent National Guard units to the Philippines during suppression of the various insurrections there through the Twenties. This global outlook was sorely tested in the Great War, and McNair's individual replacement system wasn't optimum for combat but was the best that could be done in 1942. Now an entire division can be airlifted near the battlefield (as long as the enemy cooperates) inside of 72 hours minus most of its heavy equipment. Sea lift and more aircraft could fix that shortfall, but... During the Civil War the Confederate Army would feed individuals into existing units fighting because the South didn't have the manpower nor did it have the rail lift to do otherwise. Union forces would feed an entire fresh division into battle and that had problems with the cadre being green--and semi-trained. The North had the manpower and had railroad domination over the South, so pretty much could move troops around at will and then keep them supplied--with the exception of deep raids. Sherman's March to the Sea was perhaps the largest and most successful deep penetration raid. Those deep raids couldn't replace troops and had to bring all of their supplies with them. Sometimes wounded would be left behind at the mercy of a hostile Confederacy civilian population and the Confederate armies (plural intentional--the Union Army was more cohesive than the Confederate armies due to stronger centralized command in the North versus state-oriented South). This all affects how losses are replaced.

[@sertorius3319]

If I recall correctly, feeding new recruits into existing units was primarily a practice done with conscripts - one of the benefits of volunteer service was that you’d be in a fresh regiment that would elect its own officers.

[@-r-495]

Another great presentation, simple, straight and smooth draught. „Military Green Books“ - he‘s spilled the beans on his sources (again), I guess they would make interesting audio books. I‘d probably get to fall asleep to them for the rest of my life if someone would have them recorded

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

I don't think there are enough minutes in one's life to record it all

[@-r-495]

🫡 I agree. I‘ve consumed The Gulag Archipelago (~70h) as an audio book, maybe that was quite a bit of the „why“ but not the „how“. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and reminding everyone to keep lubricated.

[@robertjames7160]

One thing you could say about the pre war manoeuvres, the swords to plough shares ideas of post World War One., lead to the use of AP (armor piercing) flour. King Arthur’s Lance.

[@lostalone9320]

Oooo another in the infrequent series of "Chieften lectures us about something mundane in a compelling way". I have never clicked faster.

[@Rusty_Gold85]

I have been reading about General Monash at the Battle of Hamel . He was the most successful at combined arms assaults and did it with a American Contingent. Cannot believe they didnt learn from that or forgot it 25 years later

[@sugarnads]

See how many were involved. A couple of companies. The local US divisional OC was willing to fight with the ANZACs but pershing found out and ordered them out. The US companies that went in were the couple of companies that were already embedded with the ANZAC units making the main assault. They really didnt 'forget'. There were very few who actually learned the lesson.

[@high633]

Love these long videos/talks for my quite weekend nights.

[@kanrakucheese]

To put the 4th's 700% casualties into prospective, the 442nd, who were repeatedly given suicide missions, had "only" 314% casualties. (And to anyone wondering how you have a greater than 100% rate in the first place: Casualty=WiA OR KiA, and replacements count so if you lose 50 of 100, get 50 replacements, then lose 51 it's 101%) As for peripheral vision and cameras in tanks: I think the solution to this will be panoramic cockpits like Zeta Gundam came up with in the 1980s where screens on the inside of the vehicle (or some kind of VR headset) combined with cameras on the outside let the operators see through it. Sorta an inverted Optical Camouflage.

[@Chilly_Billy]

America's industrial capabilities in WW2 never cease to impress me. The Axis didn't stand a chance.

[@OldMusicFan83]

Now we are like Germany in WW2. Could never recreate the the industrial power of the 1940s

[@HarryYoung97]

@@OldMusicFan83 Look up Hadrian. They are trying to automate the military industrial base, Tesla factory style. That may be our only way to defeat the superior manpower of China.

[@Br1cht]

@@OldMusicFan83 Hush now, the Sheeple gets antsy if you shock them with the truth so suddenly;)

[@gotanon9659]

​@@Br1cht Except that we can. We just never saw an enemy worth increasing production for.

[@commanderhindsight1633]

​@@OldMusicFan83 We could, given a big enough reason to. That would be the trick though.

[@bumblebeebob]

Thanks for the great talk Nick! Really enjoyed it.

[@northerncaptain855]

Great presentation! Before retirement, I had the privilege to be involved in a number of major military exercises moving large volumes of military equipment about the world as Captain of US Government owned large military transport ships. These exercises require an amazing logistical ballet.

[@tacsquirrel]

I sooo wish I could have heard and seen this in person.

[@andreasvictorious3991]

I like the Irish man giving a lecture with a beer for hydrating the vocal delivery..

[@petesheppard1709]

Thank you for a pleasant and informative Saturday afternoon!

[@TJ_Low]

I wonder how shipping of divisions differed in the Pacific Theater. Did they have more shipping capacity? Did they have any bottlenecks in shipping units between islands?

[@mpetersen6]

Well shipping divisions between the continental US and Pacific destinations largely depended on the number of ships available not only for personnel but equipment. The first US division shipped overseas as a complete unit (the 32nd ID) experienced numerous problems in just getting enough equipment prior to leaving San Francisco in early 42. For some of the issues they faced prior to being committed to combat check out "The Ghost Mountain Boys". The Army learned alot from that deployment and their consequent combat operations on New Guinea. As to the number of merchant or transport hulls available people like Henry Kaiser were solving that problem. For Army or Marine operations involved in securing beachheads and island operations a great deal would depend on just how large the piece of real estate was. But for the initial landings everything from rations to artillery pieces and their ammunition needed to be on the ships with sufficient landing craft from Higgens boats to LSTs on hand. Even with the massive output of ships, LSTs and landing craft amphibious operations needed to planned between the ETO, Pavific and Southwest Pacific theaters. Another factor to consider is port facilities at embarkation points and any available or lack of ports at destinations.

[@ryanaegis3544]

I don't know what the U.S. Navy's capacity was at the start of the war, but when they landed in the Philippines in early fall of '44, they had more men, more warships, and more logistic supplies taking part in the landing than the combined Allied forces at D-Day. This is all the more impressive not just because it was just America, not just because it was across thousands of miles of open ocean, but, in my mind, because the U.S. had the capacity to supply both invasions at essentially the same time.

[@jonprince3237]

7th Infantry Division was also redesignated 'motorised' in 1942, for potential deployment in n. Africa, and spent about 6 months training for desert warfare before it got redesignated as an infantry Division at the start of 1943 and ultimately sent to the Aleutian islands and from there through the central Pacific campaign, so about as far from the deserts of n. Africa as you could practically get and still be in the war. As a Brit., they're one of the few U.S. Divisions I've read anything much about, but they certainly held their own as a fighting formation, even if not as widely known or praised as other more glamorous units that served in n.w. Europe.

[@od1452]

I agree. My Dad served in the 7th ID from 1940 to the end of the war . He told me of the irony of training in the desert and then being sent to the Aleutians.

[@jasonpuckett3112]

longest Shiner commercial ever, love it

[@ThePinkus]

1:03:25 That was my thought on the use of air assault infantry during the initial phase of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. It doesn't count how good is Your infantrymen, paratroopers, special forces, whatever, if You are putting them where they are surrounded, fixed, and then targeted by the enemy artillery.

[@OldMusicFan83]

Airborne are supposed to be surrounded.

[@jefferyindorf699]

@@OldMusicFan83 yeah, but not fixed.

[@thomaslennon6805]

Just seen your video about Eddie, it's never good to hear of someone dying. My condolences to the family and yourself. 😢😢😢

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Different youtuber. You're thinking of Jingles

[@Freedomfred939]

Best book about this subject is "Organization of Army Ground Forces," one of the "green book" series.

[@cirian75]

shall watch this tomorrow afternoon :)

[@cosmicmuffet1053]

12:59 I could be getting something wrong, but I'm finding that photo labeled 1946 with an image search. I do see photos of him looking slightly more worn, but they're more from the 50s.

[@Adrian-qk2fn]

Ironically, at 8.00 I recognised Henry Kaiser instantly but I didn't have a clue who Knudsen was.

[@mpetersen6]

Once I heard who the name it immediately clicked. I saw a joke recently that related to US production in WWll. One Friday they forgot to switch off the production line at Willow Run and came in on Monday morning to find 18,000 B-24s piled up at the shipping doors.

[@craigmorris4083]

Damn do I love these talks. More please :)

[@davelange3853]

A suggestion to improve future videos/livestreams of this type: either get microphones for audience members asking questions, or repeat the question so video viewers can hear it.

[@gunnar6674]

1:41:32 Was it said what was the administrative offense which the soldier was given a nonjudicial punishment for? I didn't catch the question from the audience.

[@Hopolit1]

Interesting lecture, thanks for sharing

[@Lintary]

The topic of not looking at things in isolation is so broadly applicable in civilian live to. People really struggle to see the bigger interconnected picture most of the time and just focus on this single small thing.

[@usmcjawbreaker97]

I think a large scale war game involving all branches and other nato states in CONUS would be an outstanding test to find weak points, but would also be an opportunity to have a massive show of force to Russia/China

[@redspecial4102]

A Chieftan lecture? I'm in.